ArticleOxford open digital health2026
Maintenance dynamics in digital health public goods: a quasi-experimental study of issue resolution during the 2025 USAID funding disruption.
Article in Oxford open digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Open-source digital public goods play a growing role in point-of-care health service delivery in low- and middle-income countries. Many of these systems are developed and maintained by organizations that rely heavily on donor funding, making their long-term sustainability vulnerable to funding instability. The January 2025 U.S. Agency for International Development funding freeze created a rare natural experiment to observe how different organizations maintaining these systems respond under external funding shocks. Using 7922 issues from eight repositories created between June 2023 and June 2025, a DistilBERT model was fine-tuned to classify bug severity. Organizations were categorized into three funding-based models: donor-driven (primarily grant-funded), revenue-driven (sustained through commercial or internal investment), and hybrid (combining grants and revenue). Interrupted time series and Cox proportional hazards models were then applied to evaluate changes in bug-resolution efficiency. Revenue-driven organizations did not exhibit a statistically significant immediate level change but experienced significant deterioration in the post-intervention period. Donor-driven organizations exhibited no substantial changes following the intervention, maintaining stable baseline levels. Hybrid organizations showed resilience to the immediate funding shock, with a gradual decline in bug resolution as time went on after the shock. These findings suggest that the funding shocks function as a stress test for digital public goods and highlight the resilience advantages of various governance models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.